Unions save miners' lives

An examination of recent mine disasters reveals that accidents happen far more often in non-union mines.

As United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard, whose union is one of two major U.S. unions representing mine workers, said:"This is another series of fatalities at another non-union mine."

"I can absolutely say that if these miners were members of a union, they would have been able to refuse unsafe work in our collective agreements, and they would have been able to refuse that work, and would not have been subjected to that kind of atrocious conditions."

Gerard blasted the culture "that developed during the Bush years that was against regulation, against enforcement," and noted, "we’ve seen a marked improvement since the appointments of the Obama administration into Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Mine Safety and Health Administration, despite the holds placed by some Republicans.

But that’s only part of the story, as Gerard noted:"The CEO of Massey promotes himself as a union buster, promotes himself as having a record of fighting unions wherever they show up in his work place. If he spent as much time helping the workers get a union and helping us clean up his workplace we wouldn’t have these fatalities, we wouldn’t have these fines."

Massey’s accident is hardly the first that falls into this category.

Following the death of 12 miners at an explosion in January, 2006 at West Virginia’s Sago Mine, which had been cited for 200 safety violations during the prior two years, a hearing was held by the House Education and Workforce Committee.

Among those testifying were miners who had worked at both union and non-union mines.

"So I got a good taste of both sides of the spectrum," Randy Duckworth of Farmington, West Virginia told the committee. "When I was at a union-represented mine, I was greeted with a safety committee appointed by the union to oversee the health and welfare of those employees."

At a non-union mine Chuck Knisell of Morgantown, W Va., was ordered to do several things he regarded as unsafe. "I didn’t like to do it, but (my boss) said, ‘if you don’t like it, there’s the track... You’re not going to have a job. We’ve got a stack of applications this thick."

As Rep. George Miller put it, "people are in a situation where they can be intimidated if they speak out because they really don’t have the security of a safety committee" and "union representation."

In a commentary April 29, 2006 in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, titled "Stopping another Sago. There’s no question that union mines are safer," writer Charles McCollester was even more emphatic:

"A union presence at the Sago mine might well have prevented the disaster."

McCollester cited the numerous safety precautions won by unions in mines they represent, and added that union mines do a better job resisting efforts by cutthroat employers to slash safety standards or install "dubious products."

Ultimately, the key difference, he noted, is the voice union representation provides for the workers, he wrote:

"Critically, workers in a union mine are not afraid to speak. In a non-union operation, asking questions or challenging company mining practices or safety procedures can lead to termination. The company’s fear of knowledgeable, independent inspects was illustrated in their attempt to bar the entry of UMWA at Sago."

U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to spend stimulus $s overseas

Leo Gerard, President of the United Steelworkers of America, warns that the federal stimulus package passed by the House of Representatives could be undermined if the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and large multi-national corporations get their way.

The $800 plus billion stimulus is designed to pull the United States out of a deep recession that has caused over 2.55 million layoffs. A record number of Americans are now receiving unemployment compensation.

As Businessweek reported in its cover story a few weeks ago, taxpayers will lose a major bang for their buck if their stimulus money is spent on products and commodities made overseas. Thus, the House of Representatives included language in the stimulus bill aimed at ensuring that when the stimulus money is spent, it will create jobs at home.

But Gerard cautions:

"...the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to spend the tax dollars of unemployed Americans to create jobs in China and Indonesia, Korea and India...

...15 business groups sent a letter to Congress opposing provisions added to the recovery package that would strengthen existing laws requiring government agencies buy American steel and other products when building public works projects with tax dollars.

The package is, essentially, Americans agreeing to increase their national debt to revive an economy sucker punched by greedy Wall Street gamblers. So when business interests want to spend those tax dollars overseas, to create jobs there at the expense of unemployed Americans, while at the same time increasing the U.S. trade deficit, frankly, it looks a bit like treason.

To survive this economic catastrophe, Americans must assert themselves as economic patriots. They must stand up to the likes of the Chamber and the Roundtable and call them out for being economic traitors to the United States of America.

Next week the U.S. Senate will debate and pass its version of the stimulus. They should keep the Buy American provisions in the bill.

The Chamber and the Emergency Committee for American Trade are spending millions on lobbyists to weaken the very provisions that steer stimulus dollars towards the purchase of American produced goods and services. They are receiving support from companies like Caterpillar and General Electric (not surprisingly, two of the biggest job outsourcers) as well as the usual cast of Washington's corporate-funded think tanks and private equity firms like the Carlyle Group who make the hysterical claim that ensuring American tax dollars are spent in America will somehow initiate a global "trade war."

The groups and companies lobbying against the Buy American provisions in the stimulus package are trying to defend a business model that relies on economic policies that effectively incentivize corporations to ship jobs overseas, where they can avoid unions, exploit labor, and destroy the environment. Buy American laws that reward domestic businesses for staying in this country are a threat to the multinational corporate lobby.

The Chamber and its allies have no loyalty to this country or its working people. Their sole commitment is to the bottom line.

They must be stopped.

Gerard's entire article is linked.